When a court orders the payment of a debt, and despite the ruling, the debtor does not comply, we face the issues of "how to enforce financial convictions" and "how to deal with the phenomenon of inability to pay." The main topics examined in the discussion of "financial convictions" are, firstly, reviewing the strategies to compel the debtor to pay the debt and recover the judgment from their assets, and secondly, how to deal with the phenomenon of "inability to pay." Based on Imami jurisprudence, it can be said that among the strategies to compel the debtor to pay the debt are selling the assets obtained from them and imprisoning them in some cases. If it is not possible to fully recover the debt from the assets of the defendant, we will face the phenomenon of inability to pay (insolvency and bankruptcy). According to the law on the Execution of Financial Judgments, those who are convicted of paying money to others and do not pay it will be imprisoned if no assets are available from them, provided they are not insolvent. What is of great importance in this regard is, firstly, who bears the burden of proving insolvency? Secondly, how should a person who has no evidence of insolvency or affluence and is of doubtful insolvency be treated? Should they be imprisoned, or is their imprisonment conditional on proving affluence and delaying payment? If imprisonment is permissible, should they be imprisoned until the day of payment or until the situation of their insolvency and affluence becomes clear? In any case, should the court conduct the necessary investigations in examining the financial situation of the defendant, or is this solely the responsibility of the plaintif? If insolvency is proven, can the debtor be forced to work for the creditor? If a debtor has several creditors, how should the debtor's existing assets be divided among the creditors? In this research, we intend to examine this issue from the perspective of Imami jurisprudence, Iranian law, and Egyptian law.